Archive through August 29, 2009 Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 8 » Clean vs. Unclean » Archive through August 29, 2009 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Grace_alone
Registered user
Username: Grace_alone

Post Number: 1555
Registered: 6-2006


Posted on Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - 11:44 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I have a random question ~

Has "unclean" meat always equalled "unhealthy"? I know Ellen taught this, but what do the Jews believe? Was it a matter of a lack of refridgeration, or what?

Thanks!

:-) Leigh Anne
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 10293
Registered: 12-2003


Posted on Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - 2:20 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

From just my reading of the OT, my sense is that it was considered "UNCLEAN". I don't think health was really an issue. Pork and so forth were "unclean" in the same way Gentiles were unclean in the same way eating with unwashed hands was unclean, etc.

I think it had more to do with the implications of contamination—not with germs but with things not chosen by God. When Peter saw the "sheet" of animals and refused to eat, saying, "I have never eaten what is unclean," I sense his response was on the order of an Adventist's contemplating giving up Sabbath. It wasn't a fear of sickness but of removing oneself from the rank of "The Chosen".

Colleen
Hec
Registered user
Username: Hec

Post Number: 478
Registered: 3-2009
Posted on Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - 3:08 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I was thinking about this last night. Could you explain what is the meaning of

quote:

2Co 6:17 "Therefore, COME OUT FROM THEIR MIDST AND BE SEPARATE," says the Lord. "AND DO NOT TOUCH WHAT IS UNCLEAN; And I will welcome you.
2Co 6:18 "And I will be a father to you, And you shall be sons and daughters to Me," Says the Lord Almighty.



Hec
Bskillet
Registered user
Username: Bskillet

Post Number: 546
Registered: 8-2008
Posted on Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - 3:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people."

"Therefore come out from them
and be separate, says the Lord.
Touch no unclean thing,
and I will receive you."


Paul is defining unclean in terms of unbelievers, warning the Christian to not be yoked together with unbelievers. He is not defining it in terms of food. In the greater context of 2 Cor. 6, and the entire letter, he is warning them not to be yoked to the false apostles who went around teaching against Paul's Gospel.

The application for today? Do not follow after those who try to deny the essential Gospel Paul lays down for Christians.

(Message edited by bskillet on August 26, 2009)
Asurprise
Registered user
Username: Asurprise

Post Number: 1000
Registered: 7-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - 7:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hec; my Greek teacher (I audited a beginning Greek class) said; "when you see the word 'therefore,' find out what it's there for." So Bskillet was right to go back and show what it was there for. :-)

Grace_alone; God told the Jews the reason for that. It represented separation. Notice Leviticus 20:24-26; "....I am the Lord your God, Who has SEPARATED you from the peoples. You shall THEREFORE distinguish between clean animals and unclean..." "...And you shall be holy to Me, for I the Lord am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be Mine."

Now that Jesus has died and risen, He "has broken down the middle wall of separation" between Jew and Gentile "....having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is the law...." (Ephesians 2:14,15)

When Peter had that vision, God was showing him that He had cleansed the Gentiles, saying: "What God has cleansed you must not call common." (Acts 10:15) And then when Peter went to tell the Gentiles the gospel he told them: "God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean."

I'm glad "there is neither Jew nor Greek" anymore! (Galatians 3:28) No more separation! :-)
Brian3
Registered user
Username: Brian3

Post Number: 237
Registered: 8-2005


Posted on Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - 8:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

You are to take with you seven pairs, a male and its female, of all the clean animals, and two of the animals that are not clean, a male and its female, and seven pairs, male and female, of the birds of the sky--in order to keep offspring alive on the face of the whole earth.
(Gen 7:2-3 HCSB)

From the clean animals, unclean animals, birds, and every creature that crawls on the ground, two of each, male and female, entered the ark with Noah, just as God had commanded him.
(Gen 7:8-9 HCSB)

Then Noah built an altar to the LORD. He took some of every kind of clean animal and every kind of clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
(Gen 8:20 HCSB)


Notice that the "clean", "unclean" distinction was before the following:

Every living creature will be food for you; as I gave the green plants, I have given you everything.
(Gen 9:3 HCSB)


"Clean" and "Unclean" had nothing to do with food as no animals were eaten before Genesis 9.

In Christ,
Brian

P.S. If we weren't supposed to eat animals why did God make them out of meat?
Hec
Registered user
Username: Hec

Post Number: 483
Registered: 3-2009
Posted on Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - 9:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Brian3 wrote:

quote:

"Clean" and "Unclean" had nothing to do with food as no animals were eaten before Genesis 9.


What does it have to do with then?

Hec
Brian3
Registered user
Username: Brian3

Post Number: 238
Registered: 8-2005


Posted on Thursday, August 27, 2009 - 6:20 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hec,

What does the scripture say?
Then Noah built an altar to the LORD. He took some of every kind of clean animal and every kind of clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar.


In Christ,
Brian
Hec
Registered user
Username: Hec

Post Number: 485
Registered: 3-2009
Posted on Thursday, August 27, 2009 - 9:38 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Does that mean that there were clean and unclean differences before Leviticus 11? When were these differences made and to whom were they given?

Hec
Asurprise
Registered user
Username: Asurprise

Post Number: 1005
Registered: 7-2007
Posted on Thursday, August 27, 2009 - 7:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hec, only the "clean" animals were sacrificed to the Lord. That's how they knew the difference. Then after Noah went through the flood, God told him; "Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you." Genesis 9:3. Then later God had Israel only eat the "clean" animals to show separation from the Gentiles. (Lev. 20:24-26)
8thday
Registered user
Username: 8thday

Post Number: 1161
Registered: 11-2007


Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 3:22 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Speaking of clean/unclean...

I am not really educated on fish species.. just wondering why some SDA's consider anchovies unclean? When we were in the Hebrew Roots, I don't remember anyone not eating anchovies... except for maybe they thought they were disgusting. (that would be me).
Sondra
Elaine
Registered user
Username: Elaine

Post Number: 1
Registered: 8-2009
Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 3:45 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Then Noah built an altar to the LORD. He took some of every kind of clean animal and every kind of clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar.'

How could the clean animals ever reproduce if there were no mates. There are two conflicting flood stories and they disagree on whether there were two or seven of the animals.
Philharris
Registered user
Username: Philharris

Post Number: 1793
Registered: 5-2007


Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 6:34 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Elaine,

Welcome to FAF and the forum.

I am not sure what your point is concerning "two" or "seven" of every kind taken into the ark. Since both male and female were included they certainly were able to propagate which was the whole point of having them in the ark.


quote:

"And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every sort into the ark to keep them alive with you. They shall be male and female. (Gen. 6:19 ESV)



The only flood story that I know of is the one found in Genesis. What other version are you refering to?

Fearless Phil
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 1787
Registered: 4-2000


Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 8:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Phil,

The extra six pairs of clean animals and birds (Gen. 7:2,3) would be used for sacrifice (Gen. 8:20) and for food (Gen. 9:3). Thus, there was one pair (male and female) left to replenish the earth. Moreover, there is no contradiction between Gen. 6:19,20 and Gen. 7:2,3.

Dennis Fischer
Asurprise
Registered user
Username: Asurprise

Post Number: 1012
Registered: 7-2007
Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 9:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Welcome Elaine; :-)

I don't know what you mean either. Could you give specific verses? (I agree with Dennis about there not being a contradiction between Genesis 6:19,20 and Genesis 7:2,3.)
Skeeter
Registered user
Username: Skeeter

Post Number: 267
Registered: 12-2007
Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 9:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"The extra six pairs of clean animals and birds (Gen. 7:2,3) would be used for sacrifice (Gen. 8:20) and for food (Gen. 9:3). Thus, there was one pair (male and female) left to replenish the earth. Moreover, there is no contradiction between Gen. 6:19,20 and Gen. 7:2,3. " (Dennis)

Personally I have always thought that since there were 7 of each of the CLEAN (3 pair + one extra) and 2 each of the UNclean (1 pair )Genesis 7:2 (see also Genesis 7:8) that the extra ONE of each of the clean (the best)would have been saved for sacrifice. I can see where there would be a need for so many more of the "clean" animals as some of them would probably have been used as a food source for Noah's
family until such time as the dry land reappeared and vegetation was again a source for part of their food.
I cant see that it says 7 "pair" and of the UNclean animals it says "and of the animals that are not clean two, A MALE and HIS female..)to me that sounds like 2 animals. . Also where it says in Gen 7:2 "You shall take with you of every clean animal by sevens, a male and his female..." it doesnt say 7 PAIR but "by sevens".. so to me that sounds like 3 pair of males with their females and ONE extra of each of the clean animals.

In Genesis 8:20 I cannot see that there were six pair used for sacrifiees,, it says "Then Noah built an altar to the Lord, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar",. It does not say how many were sacrificed... but it just seems to make sense to me that it would be one each (the best one)of all the clean and that would have been the purpose of the odd number of the clean animals.
I am looking in the New American Standard Bible.
If course it is possible I am overlooking something... if so, please feel free to correct me.
Francie
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy

Post Number: 2975
Registered: 10-2004


Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 10:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Francie,

Most translations say "seven pairs" (or at least include this as a possible translation in a footnote). Notice also that in chapter 7, it says that all of the animals, including the clean animals, went into the ark by twos (verses 9 and 15), further indicating that there was an even number of clean animals (14).

Young's Literal Translation says:


quote:

"2of all the clean beasts thou dost take to thee seven pairs, a male and its female; and of the beasts which are not clean two, a male and its female;
3also, of fowl of the heavens seven pairs, a male and a female, to keep alive seed on the face of all the earth;" (Genesis 7:2-3 YLT.)




So there were 14 clean animals and two unclean animals.

The CEV says:


quote:

Take seven pairs of every kind of animal that can be used for sacrifice [a] and one pair of all others. 3Also take seven pairs of every kind of bird with you. Do this so there will always be animals and birds on the earth.

Footnotes:
a. Genesis 7:2 animal. . . for sacrifice: Hebrew "clean animals." Animals that could be used for sacrifice were called "clean," and animals that could not be used were called "unclean."




As the CEV explains above, the "clean" and "unclean" had to do with sacrifice and had nothing to do with food (man had not even been given permission to eat meat before the Flood and the restriction about clean/unclean meats was only given to Israel, and at a much later time).

As for what Noah ate after the Flood, God told him: "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant." (Genesis 9:3 NASB.)

So Noah ate "unclean" as well as "clean" animals. There was no distinction for eating (except for the Jews, later, as I mentioned, until Jesus came).

Jeremy

(Message edited by Jeremy on August 29, 2009)
Skeeter
Registered user
Username: Skeeter

Post Number: 269
Registered: 12-2007
Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 10:24 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thank you Jeremy,
I need to look at a few other translations :-)
I have several here,, but have heard several times that the NAS is supposed to be the closest to the original Hebrew and Greek... so have been using mostly that version lately.
As SDA we were told that the original King James was the best... until the (clearly distorted WORD) version came out of course ! :-(
Skeeter
Registered user
Username: Skeeter

Post Number: 270
Registered: 12-2007
Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 10:32 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I just put in a computer search and this came up.

Apologetics Press :: Scripturally Speaking

How Many Clean Animals Did Noah Take into the Ark—Seven or Fourteen?
by Bert Thompson, Ph.D. and Trevor Major, M.Sc., M.A.


Printer version | Email this article


Q.

Genesis 7:2 says that God told Noah to take clean animals into the Ark “seven by seven.” Does this mean Noah took fourteen of each clean animal into the boat?

A.

In Genesis 7, God instructed Noah to take onboard the ark certain animals in order to save them from the Flood. Concerning clean animals, He said:

Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee seven and seven, the male and his female; and of the beasts that are not clean two, the male and his female (7:2).
Through the years, serious Bible students have wondered: How many clean animals did Noah take into the ark—seven, or fourteen? Generally, there are two opposing views on the precise number of each kind of animal involved. One view is expressed by the following statement from John T. Willis:

It is impossible to determine certainly whether the Hebrew phrase, shibb’ah shibbah means “by sevens” (KJV), that is, seven animals of all clean species, or “seven and seven” (ASV) or seven pairs (RSV, NEB), that is fourteen animals of all clean species.... There can be no certainty on this point (1979, p. 171).
However, others have been more decisive on the matter, suggesting real purpose and reason to the interpretation that there were only seven of every clean kind on the ark. Animal sacrifice to God was practiced during the Patriarchal Age, and it is apparent that the faithful could distinguish between the clean and unclean. Thus, it is suggested that when Noah left the ark and offered a sacrifice to God “of every clean animal” (Genesis 8:20), three pairs were left for domestication by man so that he would have food and clothing. The pattern, as Matthew Henry noted, then follows that of the working week and Sabbath day, in that “God gives us six for one in earthly things, as in the days of the week,” while the seventh is for devotion to God (n.d., p. 61).

On the actual exegesis of the passage, H.C. Leupold, in his Exposition of Genesis, argued:


The Hebrew expression “take seven seven” means “seven each” [here he refers to Koenig’s syntax and Gesenius’ Grammatik—BT/TM]. Hebrew parallels support this explanation. In any case, it would be a most clumsy method of trying to say “fourteen” (1990, 1:290).
While it is difficult to speak dogmatically on this issue, it is clear that the opinion of many conservative scholars weighs heavily in favor of the interpretation that there were seven clean, and two unclean, of every animal kind on Noah’s ark.

REFERENCES

Henry, Matthew (no date), Genesis to Deuteronomy (MacLean, VA: MacDonald).

Leupold, H.C. (1990 reprint), Exposition of Genesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker), reprint of 1942 Wartsburg Press edition.

Willis, John T. (1979), “Genesis,” The Living Word Commentary (Austin, TX: Sweet).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally published in Reason and Revelation, December 1986, 6[12]:49-50.
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy

Post Number: 2977
Registered: 10-2004


Posted on Saturday, August 29, 2009 - 10:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Skeeter,

Yes, the NASB is usually the closest to the original Hebrew and Greek, of all of the popular translations. And the Hebrew does says "sevens" as the NASB says. But the plural "sevens" apparently means "seven pairs." Notice that for the unclean animals it simply says "two" (singular) but for the clean animals it says "by sevens" (plural, meaning seven pairs).

Jeremy

(Message edited by Jeremy on August 29, 2009)

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration